Home secretary hails ‘world-leading’ laws, which include forcing
web and phone companies to collect browsing histories

The law gives police new powers to hack into
computers and phones and to collect communications data in bulk.
Photograph: Felix Clay for the Guardian

The “snooper’s charter” bill extending the reach of state
surveillance in Britain was given royal assent and became law on
Tuesday as signatures on a
petition calling for it to be repealed passed the 130,000 mark.

But privacy campaigners claimed that it would provide an
international standard to authoritarian regimes around the world to
justify their own intrusive surveillance powers.

The new surveillance law requires web and phone companies to
store everyone’s web browsing histories for 12 months and give the
police, security services and official agencies unprecedented access
to the data.

It also provides the security services and police with new powers
to hack into computers and phones and to collect communications data
in bulk. The law requires judges to sign off police requests to view
journalists’ call and web records, but the measure has been
described as “a death sentence for investigative journalism” in the
UK.

The Home Office says some of the provisions in the act will
require extensive testing and will not be in place for some time.
However, powers to require web and phone companies to collect
customers’ communications data will be in force before 31 December,
the date when the current Data Retention and Investigatory Powers
Act 2014 expires.

“The government is clear that, at a time of heightened security
threat, it is essential our law enforcement and security and
intelligence services have the power they need to keep people safe.
The internet presents new opportunities for terrorists and we must
ensure we have the capabilities to confront this challenge. But it
is also right that these powers are subject to strict safeguards and
rigorous oversight.”

Jim Killock, executive director of the Open Rights Group,
responded to the home secretary’s “world-leading” claim, saying:
“She is right, it is one of the most extreme surveillance laws ever
passed in a democracy. The IP Act will have an impact that goes
beyond the UK’s shores. It is likely that other countries, including
authoritarian regimes with poor human rights records, will use this
law to justify their own intrusive surveillance powers.”

He said the legislation was debated and passed while the public,
media and politicians were preoccupied with Brexit: “Now that the
bill has passed, there is renewed concern about the extent of the
powers that will be given to the police and security agencies.

“In particular, people appear to be worried about new powers that
mean our web browsing activity can be collected by internet service
providers and viewed by the police and a whole range of government
departments. Parliament may choose to ignore calls for a debate but
this could undermine public confidence in these intrusive powers.”

The European court of justice is due to clarify its rulings on
state surveillance shortly,
in a case brought by the deputy leader of the Labour party, Tom
Watson. The court’s ruling could lead to parts of the new
legislation being declared unlawful and in need of amendment,
including restrictions on how the personal confidential data
involved can be used and accessed.